Forum
Read and express views
× Latest Case Laws on Income Tax by various Income Tax Appellate Tribunals in India

These are the latest case laws decided by various Income Tax Appellate Tribunals (ITAT) of India on Income Tax which have been published recently. The case laws are open for discussion and we invite expert comments from our members on its applicability and effect on relevant issues.

12-07-2019, Manita, Section 263, 10(38), Tribunal Delhi

  • amit
  • amit's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Administrator
  • Administrator
More
3 months 16 hours ago - 3 months 16 hours ago #10059 by amit
Section - 263, 10(38)
Order Date - 12-07-2019
Favouring - Assessee
Court - Tribunal Delhi
Appellant - Manita
Respondent - PCIT
Justice - Bhavnesh Saini JM & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar AM
Citation - 719Taxpundit156
Appeal No. - ITA.No.3432/Del./2019
Asstt. Year - 2014-2015

Order

PER : BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M.

This appeal by Assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. Pr. CIT, Muzaffarnagar, Dated 18.03.2019, under section 263 of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the A.Y. 2014-2015.

2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is an individual and nature of business as shown in the assessment order is “Income from Long Term Capital Gains on Shares”. In this case, return of income was filed on 31.03.2005 showing income of Rs.5,25,960/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS for reasons of suspicious long term capital gains on shares. Statutory notices were issued time to time. Assessee attended the proceedings before A.O. filed written submissions along with copy of computation of income, audit report, Trading & Profit & Loss Account & Balance-sheet. The A.O. noted that in response to the notice issued, assessee has furnished written submissions along with copy of Demat A/c, source of investment in shares, bank account, copy of share certificates, copy of account of Mathiyan Construction and same is taken on record. The A.O. after discussing the case with the Assessee’s Counsel, completed the assessment at returned income vide Order dated 22.12.2016 under section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961.

3. The Ld. Pr. CIT on examination of the record found that A.O. has completed the assessment without examining the case properly. Therefore, notice under section 263 of the I.T. Act was issued on 29.01.2019 [PB-45] which is also reproduced in the impugned order in which it was stated that assessee has earned long term capital gains of Rs.70,90,508/- on sale of 4200 shares of M/s. Turbotech Engineering Ltd., in assessment year under appeal which is claimed exempt under section 10(38) of the I.T. Act. The A.O. failed to make enquiries from share broker, bank etc., and the Company for whom shares were purchased. The A.O. also did not make any enquiry with regard to investment of Rs 72,00,000/- with M/s. Mohit Ispat (P) Ltd., and A.O has also failed to examine the issue of incurring of Rs.10,78,472/- towards construction of home. Ld. Pr. CIT, therefore, found the assessment order to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue.

The explanation of assessee was called for. The assessee filed detailed written submissions before Ld. Pr. CIT which is reproduced in the impugned order in which the assessee highlighted that detailed replies along with documentary evidences were filed before A.O. on the issues time to time which have been examined by the A.O. Therefore, there is no case of failure to make any enquiry at the assessment stage. The assessee relied upon several decisions in support of the contention. Ld. Pr. CIT, however, found that Order have been passed without making proper enquiry on the above issues despite case was selected for scrutiny. Hence, the case is covered by Clause (a) of Explanation-2 of Section 263(1) of the I.T. Act. Ld. Pr. CIT also noted that report of Investigation Wing were not utilised by the A.O. Further, A.O. did not make any enquiry on the issues stated in the notice. Therefore assessment order was set aside with a direction to the A.O. to pass assessment order afresh in accordance with the provisions of Law.

4. The assessee is in appeal challenging the impugned order under section 263 of the I.T. Act. Learned Counsel for the Assessee reiterated the submissions made before the Ld. Pr. CIT. Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that all the three issues on which proposed action under section 263 have been taken, all these issues have been duly examined by the A.O. and assessment order have been rightly made. The assessee has given details of sale and purchases in the return of income on the issue of capital gains earned on sale of shares. The A.O. issued questionnaire on the issue which is duly replied by assessee supported by bank statements and other materials. The assessee also filed details and evidences, sale and purchase of shares, supported by copy of the receipt for purchase of shares, copy of account in the books of the broker through whom the sales were made, copy of contract note and certificate of the broker The assessee also filed reply supported by cash flow statement and cash book to prove source of construction, copy of the Demat account was also filed along with copy of account in Mathiyan Construction in which the assessee is a partner to prove the source of purchases on shares. In the cash flow and cash book of the entries of investment with M/s. Mohit Ispat (P) Ltd., and amount incurred towards construction have been explained. The assessee also filed copy of the share certificates, bank

Click to view and download Full Free Judgement of Manita vs. PCIT

Unable to display Google Map.




Last edit: 3 months 16 hours ago by amit.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.088 seconds

If You Appreciate What We Do Here On TaxPundit, You Should Consider:

We are thankful for your never ending support.

Latest Analysis - High Courts

Akrati Promoters And Developers vs. DCIT

Akrati Promoters And Developers vs. DCIT

Akrati Promoters And Developers vs. DCIT Read More
CIT vs. ANOOP JAIN

CIT vs. ANOOP JAIN

CIT vs. ANOOP JAIN Read More
PCIT vs. LALIT BAGAI

PCIT vs. LALIT BAGAI

PCIT vs. LALIT BAGAI  Read More
ROHIT KUMAR GUPTA vs. PCIT

ROHIT KUMAR GUPTA vs. PCIT

ROHIT KUMAR GUPTA vs. PCIT Read More
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42

Forum Features

Latest Case Laws
Latest Case Laws are instantly updated in the Forum into their respective section
Latest from CBDT
Latest Circulars, Notifications, Orders etc. from CBDT is updated in the Forum
Ask Experts
You can ask questions to the community
Support
Support queries are either replied via mail or in the Forum so that others can be benefited
Press Releases
Latest Press Notes and Press Releases are updated in the Forum
Connect with Members
You can connect with our community members by replying to their queries

Recommended Articles

 

SITE INFORMATION

All content herein is the copyright of Taxpundit. No images, text, or any other content may be, reproduced or redistributed without the express written consent of Taxpundit.

All Rights Reserved. All Content Copyright.

Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter and stay updated on the latest developments and special offers!

Company Master Data Since 1900. More than 1.75 Million Records. Register/Login to get FREE access. Read more
Toggle Bar